Secure, Clean and Affordable?

The Energy and Climate Change Committee has recently issued a call for evidence on "Energy Prices, Profits and Poverty". The call takes as an axiom that there is a need to deliver "secure, clean and affordable" energy in the future. Is this possible or is this a conundrum too far? Security inevitably means some redundancy - or at least access to reliable alternatives at times of stress. That comes with a price tag. Similarly, as ROCs, FiTs etc. imply, clean only comes at a premium to dirty.

Now, one could argue that all that is happening here is that externalities are being more nearly properly priced. We are/will be paying for the damage that CO2, say, has done/is doing. There is a lot to be said for proper pricing of goods and bads. However, where does that takes us on the affordability axis? Into a very uncomfortable place, I'd argue.

I have no answers - there are some massive social engineering issues that could arise here. So, for me, a conundrum it remains; but one that needs resolution. Somehow I doubt that the Committee will find one soon.

Twitter, Freedom to Abuse, and the Law

Twitter and other social media have been hailed as great levellers and promoters of democracy. However, as recent events have shown there is a down side.

The storm of hate and invective that was visited upon Ryan Lanza, brother of Adam Lanza the perpetrator of the conneticut school massacre, was simple unwarranted, unfair and sickening.

Similarly Lord McAlpine saw his name being smeared across the Twittersphere with false accusation. He, now, is threatening to take many tweeters and retweeters to court.

What does all this mean? Will successful law cases make the dizzy fingered less likely to put digit to keyboard before engaging brain? Will it all backfire on Lord McA? What will the courts decide anyway?

Answers on a post card, please............

And do think twice before you tweet!

Season's Greetings To All Our Readers

Please accept with no obligation implied, my best wishes for an
environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low stress, non-addictive,
gender neutral, celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practised within
the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice or
secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular
persuasion or secular traditions of all.

And a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling, and medically
uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar
year 2013, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other
cultures whose contributions to society have helped make Britain great, (not
to imply that Britain is necessarily greater than any other country or is
the only "Britain" in the Western Hemisphere), and without regard to the
race, creed, colour, age, physical ability, religious faith, or sexual
preference of the wishee.

By accepting this greeting, you are accepting these terms: This greeting is
subject to clarification or withdrawal. It is freely transferable provided
there is no alteration to the original. It implies no promise by the wisher
to actually implement any of the wishes for her/himself or others, is void
where prohibited by law, and is revocable at the sole discretion of the
wisher. This wish is warranted to perform as expected within the usual
application of good tidings for a period of one year, or until the issuance
of a subsequent holiday greeting, whichever comes first, and warranty is
limited to repair of this wish or issuance of a replacement wish at the sole
discretion of the wisher.

Parliamentary Boundary Changes

How many of you know that there's a sizeable exercise going on looking at changing parliamentary constituency boundaries? Well, there is. And at the moment as far as my local ward is concerned it looks like a very flat-footed as-long-as-the-numbers-fit-that's-alright affair. We have until just Monday to send in representations. Mine, related to the Blackheath and Bramley ward is below:

Proposed Changes to Parliamentary Boundaries in England

South East England

 

The following concerns the proposed transfer of the ward of Blackheath & Wonersh from Guildford constituency to Mid Surrey (largely the current Mole Valley) constituency.

 

1.    I have been a resident of Wonersh since 1980 and a Parish Councillor for Wonersh since 2003 so these comments arise from a fair degree of local knowledge.

 

2.    I object to the proposed transfer as I believe it will marginalize residents of the ward from Westminster politics. The proposal removes them from a constituency centred on the town of Guildford with which they have a natural affinity, to one centred on Dorking for which no such affinity exists nor is likely to be created.

 

a.    The principle road connections (A281 & B2128) are with Guildford.

 

b.    The principle public transport connections (bus services 53 & 63) are with Guildford.

 

c.    The primary shopping centre for residents is Guildford.

 

d.    Access to the railway infrastructure is via Guildford station.

e.    Guildford provides the main local entertainment and leisure facilities (e.g. Yvonne Arnaud theatre, G-Live entertainment centre).

3.    The foregoing suggests that the assertion at paragraph 3.4 of your Revised Proposals document (“…….the revised proposals better reflect….local ties……”) cannot be substantiated.

4.    The proposed changes would appear to entail a net transfer of 2196 electors from Guildford constituency to Mid Surrey/Mole Valley. This is a modest change to result from a gross transfer out of 13996 electors!

5.    Much weight seems to have been placed upon the argument that the wards of Send, Clandon & Horsley, and Lovelace (currently in Mole Valley constituency) should naturally be in Guildford constituency given that they form part of Guildford Borough. These wards do, however, have much stronger links with other Mole Valley wards, and with Dorking than does Blackheath and Wonersh. There is thus likely to be a net marginalization of electors arising from the proposed changes.

Damned by Indifference?

Recently we took ourselves off to the National Theatre to see a performance of Damned by Despair, a play by a 17th century Spanish friar Tirso de Molina, in a modern version created by Frank McGuinness. I've bemoaned low theatre audiences in this blog before but, really, there is no excuse for a half-empty house for this play at one of the UK's foremost theatres.

What is it that puts people off? Admittedly this production did not get ringing endorsement from the critics but they did not totally write it off either. It is a slightly patchy affair and Frank McGuiness's script does seem a bit wayward in places. However, the overall effect is still very powerful - this is, after all, acclaimed as a masterpiece of the Spanish Golden Era - and the cast is uniformly good. Also, as it is part of the Travelex season it is possible to have a seat for just £12.

Could it be that audiences are just indifferent to anything slightly challenging or out of the ordinary? Will they only flock to 5 star rated shows? There is a hackneyed saying: "Use it or loose it". Maybe this will not be true of the National but for other theatres it is already a reality. There are still a few dates left in this current run - go on - dig out that £12 (or more for a premium seat) - and enjoy the experience.

Planet Pickles Strikes Again

As ever, I'm slightly behind with my reading of news feeds. This, from the Grauniad, has just caught my eye. I have wondered before about the out-of-this-world phenomenon that is Planet Pickles. Perhaps he should just look at what can actually be achieved by careful implementation of fortnightly refuse collections. The service where I live - in Waverley - from my point of view as a consumer works excellently. And recyling rates are almost at 60% - not brilliant but pretty good and up on the rate from the borough's previous regime. Perhaps Pickles should look to rewarding councils that achieve high recycling rates and low total refuse volumes rather than bashing them for not following an outdated weekly reime.

Turn Down The Heat

This post's title is lifted directly from a report by the World Bank - more fully "Turn Down The Heat: Why a 4degC Warmer World Must Be Avoided". This report warns that there's a 20% chance that global temperatures could reach 4degC above pre-industrial levels by 2100 under current mitigation commitment and pledges. This is less scary than PriceWaterhouseCooper's 6degC warning (I somehow I have difficulty taking climate change predictions from a bunch of accountants seriously) but sobering none-the-less.

Now many people will look at 2100 and say "Well I'll not be around by then, so what". That's true; and perhaps even our children won't be. However, think about the trajectory - our kid's are very likely to be here in 2050 (even I might just be). If the gloomy predictions are proved correct then there will already be significant changes taking place. We look out for our kids in their early life, should we not be doing the same for their future?

We Had No Green Thing Back In Our Day

I'm not a great one for forwarding on round robin emails etc.  but I received the following today and thought that just for once I'd share it:

Checking out at the store, the young cashier suggested to the older woman that she should bring her own shopping bags because plastic bags weren't good for the environment. The woman apologized and explained, "We didn't have this green thing back in my earlier days."

The cashier responded, "That's our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to
save our environment for future generations." She was right -- our generation didn't have the green thing in its day. Back then, we returned milk bottles, pop bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over. So they really were recycled. We refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we replaced the razor blades in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull.
But we didn't have the green thing back in our day.

We walked up stairs, because we didn't have an escalator in every shop and office building. We walked to the grocery store and didn't climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks. But she was right.
We didn't have the green thing in our day.

Back then, we washed the baby's nappies because we didn't have the throw-away kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy gobbling machine burning up 220 volts -- wind and solar power really did dry our clothes back in our early days. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing. But that young lady is right.
We didn't have the green thing back in our day.

Back then, we had one TV, or radio, in the house -- not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief (remember them?), not a screen the size of the county of Yorkshire. In the kitchen, we blended and stirred by hand because we didn't have electric machines to do everything for us. When we packaged a fragile item to send in the post, we used wadded up old newspapers to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap. Back then, we didn't fire up an engine and burn petrol just to cut the lawn. We used a push mower that ran on human power. We exercised by working so we didn't need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity. But she's right.
We didn't have the green thing back then.

We drank water from a fountain or a tap when we were thirsty instead of demanding a plastic bottle flown in from another country. We accepted that a lot of food was seasonal and didn?t expect that to be bucked by flying it thousands of air miles around the world. We actually cooked food that didn?t come out of a packet, tin or plastic wrap and we could even wash our own vegetables and chop our own salad.
But we didn't have the green thing back then.

Back then, people took the tram or a bus, and kids rode their bikes to school or walked instead of turning their mothers into a 24-hour taxi service. We had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And we didn't need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 2,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest pizza joint.

But isn't it sad that the current generation laments how wasteful we old folks were just because we didn't have the green thing back then?

Please forward this on to another selfish old person who needs a lesson in conservation from a young person.
Remember: Don't make old people mad. We don't like being old in the first place, so it doesn't take much to piss us off!

Caution Required

On occasion I dip into a blog written by Maxine Perella. The most recent I've seen is one picking up on the BBC2 programme Operation Iceberg. I've not yet seen this - and from Maxine's account it seems that it is something I should do. However, what I want to mention is a cautionary tale about scare mongering.

Clearly the programme describes a natural phenomenon - the creation and eventual death of an iceberg. Maxine, however, leaps to a link with climate change and complains that this was not mentioned until 35 minutes into the programme. Now I'm sure that climate change is leading to accelerated ice loss but we shouldn't make linkages where they are not substantiated. In this case it sounds as though they were not.

A Scary Place

There are many scary things out there, including:

     another bunch of identikit Chinese leaders has been wheeled out;
     the Eurozone is back in recession;
     the Middle East looks to increasingly be like a tinder box.

It was the Chinese that really caught my eye. China could well be at a turning point in its economy and one just has to wonder whether the new band of grey suited, black haired, red tied Party boys have what it takes to manage the change or whether they are, as I intimated above, died in the same old wool.

Among the challenges facing the country are

     how to cope with its staggering population growth (480M in 30 years);
     how to manage the threat that rising wages will erode its competitiveness (tho' there are signs that China may manage to pull off the "keep productivity rises above wage rises" trick);
     what to do about its demographics (the proportion of over 60s rose from 10.4% to 13.3% in the decade to 2010 while under 14s declined from 22.9% to 16.6%).

Would you want to cope with that over the next 10 years? Wish the Party boys some luck - the world needs a China that doesn't implode.

Who Pays For QE?

So the Bank of England is reigning back on QE but holding interest rates at 0.5%. I guess the former should be regarded as good news. Do you realise that over the last few months HMG issued about as much debt as the Bank bought? Sounds a bit like a Ponzi scheme to me. And who is paying for it? Why, you and me. That's also true of the Funding for Lending scheme. Banks have the scheme as a cheap source of lending capital; they don't need to rely so much upon savers' deposits; therefore they don't need to entice us in with decent interest rates. Thanks, Mr Osborne!

Victim of Dumbing Down or Recession?

We went to a production of Tom Kempinski's play Duet for One at the Yvonne Arnaud Theatre last night. It proved to be a totally engaging evening with excellent performances by Haydn Gwynne and William Gaunt. Sadly the theatre was less than one third full. What is the problem? Surely the good citizens of Guildford and SW Surrey are not suffering that much from the financial downturn that they can't afford a night out at the theatre? Or are they simply unwilling to engage in something that requires a little smidgin of intellectaul effort? Either way, this is not good news for theatre in this corner of the world. We already have a dark Redgrave Theatre and a severely dumbed-down Thorndike - surely the Yvonne Arnaud (for all its faults - and it has a few) cannot go the same way - or will it?

Keeping Up With the Joneses

Interesting piece in Building 4 Change about "peer pressure" driving the installation of clusters of PV arrays. This particular instance is from California but I certainly noticed a surge of questioning immediately after we installed our panels and at least one neighbour has followed suit; I think partly based on our experiences.

Of course, it's easier to do with visible technology. The big prize is behaviour change through social pressure which is just a little more tricky!

4 CCS Projects Through to Next Stage

DECC today announced that 4 CCS projects have been shortlisted for the next stage of their competition. Having had a small (very small!) part to play in one of those bids I am really quite excited. I must admit that I had thought that the shortlist might be one project shorter - for this technology £1bn doesn't actually go all that far - but I also thought that we'd see the 2Co project up there - and it isn't! Just shows how wrong one can be.

Hitachi Got It

Interesting. So Hitachi will be purchasing Horizon. As per a previous post it was down to one of two (or none at all) but it is a significant point that this will introduce yet another reactor type into the UK - a BWR. It is, a least, a tried and tested system. Gone are the days of 3 different AGR designs being constructed simultaneously (thank goodness).

Also interesting to note the name of Rolls-Royce cropping up here when they also have an MOU with Rosatom.

So, now it's down to Hitachi to complete the deal and get on with having their design fully tested and certified. It all means that we are unlikely to see one of these beasties in action before the early 2020s. So the risk of several years of tight capacity margins in the middle of this decade remains. Start saving your pennies now - electricity is going to become more and more expensive.

EdF Throws Down Gauntlet

There was a very firm statement from Vincent de Rivaz of EdF at the Commons Energy and Climate Change Committee yesterday. "The responsibility is on the Government and us to deliver the CfD and transitional arrangements" he said. It was very obvious that the sub-text was a need for sufficient certainty on EdF's behalf to allow them to proceed to investment. However, interestingly he said that EdF did not expect consumers to take on construction risk - i.e. it should not explicitly feature in the CfD. It's difficult to buy this. Construction risk should be part of business as usual for EdF but it must feature to some extent in the CfD stike price because it is only through these revenues that EdF will make any margin on it prospective investment. Rupert Steele of Iberdrola/Scottish Power was somewhat more open on this question. Probably the most telling comment was de Rivaz's "If there is not clarity we will not invest". This was all about the need to have long-term certainty behind the CfD. Over to you Government - and in particular DECC!

What was he thinking?

So David Cameron wants to force energy companies to put customers on the lowest tariff. Or does he? What the Prime Minister said was, of course, utter tosh. But is that what he meant to say? My betting is not. I suspect that the policy being considered is something along the lines of giving customers the option to move onto the cheapest tariff - or perhaps the other way around, the option to stay as they are rather than be moved onto something that the company considers to be cheaper, having done some analysis on usage patterns etc. Thereby hangs an interesting sting - until we get smart metering that analysis is just a little tricky.

There's also the problematic push-me-pull-you of wanting people to reduce energy consumption against playing to the cheap energy gallery.

And politicians don't seem to think through the fundamentals of energy issues. Take natural gas, for instance. It's a commodity. All the energy companies buy from the same sources in the same market place. All that is going to distinguish them as far as costs are concerned is the ability of their traders to time their deals cleverly, and their on-going non-product cost base. Frankly there ain't going to be much of a differential between the companies. So, surprise, surprise, competition is at the margin. Ditto for electricity.

What the country needs is to create a situation within which companies have the confidence to invest - especially electricity generators. Who would build a nuclear power station with huge up-front capital costs if there was a strong likelihood that some ill-informed politician would be forever fiddling with the market?

Did Anyone Notice?

October 13th was Disaster Risk Reduction Day. Did anyone notice?

Into Mervyn's Shoes?

Last Thursday Adair Turner used his Mansion House speech to pitch for the role of Governor of the Bank of England. Is he the man for the job? Very early on in the speech there's a "not me, guv" piece where he argues that he was not party to the failure of the FSA in the run-up to the financial crisis (he took the helm very shortly after Lehmans collapsed). Fair enough, although one might note that it was the Americans, not the FSA under Turner's watch, that spotted the Libor debacle. However, there is one big issue that he cannot avoid. That's his long term campaigning to get the UK to adopt the euro. He now admits he was wrong but that's one awful bad call (bad judgement). Should someone who got that so wrong be the next incumbent of Threadneedle Street? I'd say not.

Euro Chat

Angela Merkel's recent visit to Greece is a reminder that the Euro crisis rumbles on. I've mused before on the likelihood, or otherwise, of the Euro surviving - with my "man-in-the-street-no-I'm-not-an-economist" hat on. My untutored view has been that the Euro zone was an economic backdoor to an, at the time (and still now), unachievable political aim - i.e. political integration of Europe quite probably as some sort of federation.

Recently a kind colleague has suggested that I educate myself in this area and look up the "Theory of Optimum Currency Areas" so I have, indeed, turned to that fount of all knowledge Wikipedia. I'm struck by the four conditions for a successful currency union:

• labour mobility
• openness with capital mobility with wage and price flexibility
• a centralised risk-sharing fiscal policy
• broadly symmetrical business cycles within each participating region or country.

So how does the Euro zone stack up?

Well, labour mobility is enshrined in law but there are language and cultural barriers which means that Europe looks nothing like the much more mobile US.

How about wage and price flexibility? Well, if that really existed Greek, Spanish and Irish wages would be pushed down to restore competitiveness. If that's happening then it's a slow process (and, inevitably, a painful one).

Centralised risk sharing? No. There's no central policy. The Stability and Growth Pact was widely ignored. Germany (or individual Germans, at least) are very wary of cross-subsidising southern Europe.

Symmetric business cycles? Very clearly not. Europe's core and periphery have very different economies. Right now Germany is still growing through its export-led policies; many of the southern countries are close to being basket cases.

My conclusion? I go back to my opening paragraph. The Euro was a political project which tried to ignore the clear economic problems it engendered. There either has to be closer fiscal integration or an admission of rather expensive defeat.

No Longer Eco-Bling

A few weeks ago ING Direct released the results of a small (apparently 1000 people) survey into what they consider to be property "deal-sealers" and solar pv came top at 38%. This is something of a change since the days when having such panels on your roof was regarded, rather sniffily, as eco-bling. This makes me wonder if their value is being properly priced into the overall consideration. I've just sent off for my second quarterly payment for my system and so far it looks as though I could achieve simple payback in under 10 years, just as I had calculated before signing on the dotted line. And that was allowing for a reasonably severe degradation rate. Even if one factors in the likely requirement for a replacement inverter after, say, 12 years that still makes these panels a pretty valuable asset.

Nuclear Moves - Or Not

I've had the occasional rumble in this blog about my belief that there is an urgent need for the UK to build its next generation of nuclear power stations as soon as possible. Things continue to grind slowly. Last month the Planning Inspectorate was able to announce that the inspection into EdF's Hinkley Point application had concluded - after having taken the full six months allowed. A decision on the application is due by 21 March 2013. So, progress of a sort.

There are also mutterings that EdF has sent a draft of its Statement of Community Consultation to the relevant local authorities with respect to its plans for Sizewell although I couldn't find anything on EdF's website. So, possibly progress here, too.

Meanwhile NuGen (Iberdrola and GDF Suez) is not due to make any meaningful decision over its Sellafield (quaintly named "Moorside") site until 2015.

And the real fly in the ointment is Horizon, which owns sites at Oldbury and Wylfa. EoN and RWE put Horizon up for sale a while ago and it appears that only two consortia have actually tabled bids: one led by Westinghouse and the other by Hitachi. Both Areva and Rosatom had been thought to be in the frame but declined to bid in the end.

It's a case of "Don't hold your breath", then. I guess with a following wind Hinkley could get on the bars before 2020, and just conceivably Sizewell, but I don't see any likelihood of any of the others meeting that sort of timescale.

Windy Peak

September 14 - a new record for wind generation - at 09:56 the feed was 4.131GW. Now that's a significant capacity - funny how these things creep up on one. The forecast for the next day was 2.86GW (not sure about the actual) - just shows that the intermittency issue is going to grow ,too.

The Time Constant for CO2 Reporting

Still catching up I picked up edie's short note on CO2 reporting from local authorities (as reported by DECC). The note explains that 97% of local authorities in the UK reported increased emissions between 2009 and 2010, reversing the results from 2008 to 2009. The two main reasons given are increased natural gas usage for space heating because 2010 was a particularly cold year; and the electricity generation fuel mix moving from nuclear to fossil.

There are some important lessons for trend watchers here. Increased space heating could not be put down as a trend on this two-point basis - a longer time series would be required to ascertain any trend (unless someone has a very good, tried and trusted, temperature normalisation tecinique). However, given what we know about retirement of nuclear power stations and the slow progress towards replacements, or any meaningful, reliable renewables, then the second reason given above could be seen as the start of a trend; and a dangerous one.

Vodafone Eurotraveller - No Thanks!

Those nice people at Vodafone have just offered me their Eurotraveller product at £3 per day for every day I use my mobile in Europe (I would then be charged at my normal charge rates). Now I go to Europe for a holiday - i.e. to get away from things. And that means minimal 'phone usage - probably less than 5 minutes on any day that I actually use the 'phone. So £3 for the marginal second seems like rather a lot. No thanks, Vodafone!

Another Statement of the Obvious?

In August (yes, I am still catching up on my reading!) Chatham House released a report entitled The 'Shale Gas Revolution': Developments and Changes. Inter alia it notes

• the European shale gas situation is different to the US one - politics, planning laws, geology all making European development more tricky
• shale gas development in the US has ut downward pressure on gas prices (indeed, some production is only profitable because of the associated C3, C4, C5 liquids)
• shale gas may substitute for renewables rather than for coal
• shale gas can only be a transition fuel, not a greenhouse gas solution.

So what's new?

In an interview the author also makes the general statement that "the only way forward is to implement carbon pricing" but to achieve something meaningful require the involvement of the US, China and the EU. The likelihood of achieving this is thin!

OK, as I said, so what's new?

Greek Construction

I recently came across this announcement of the first Greek commercial premises to be BREEAM certified. This is a little piece of good news coming out of a dire situation but it got me to thinking about how one constructs buildings for the extremes of conditions experienced in many countries. In a way, in the UK we should have it easy - we have a relatively narrow range of ambient temperatures to deal with. What changes does one have to make to cope with both lower and higher temperatures? (I don't know - I'm no civil engineer). And what can one do to retrofit successfully? The little town house that we have stayed in during recent trips to Greece is a case in point. It has good thick walls which keeps the downstairs room nicely cool in the summer, but the upstairs room with a wood-lined ceiling immediately under the tiled roof can get very hot under the afternoon sun. Then again, on the few occasions that we have experienced a drop in temperature the house can be uncomfortably cold and the only heating is by portable electric fire or an traditional open hearth grate. There will be a lot of properties like this in the country. What would one have to do to make them more efficient? And what would be the cost?

Britain Top EE Nation?

In July I noticed several headlines hailing Britain as the top nation as far as energy efficieny is concerned. Upon checking this out I find that the reoprt from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy only looked at 12 nations; and then Britain scored 67 out of a possible 100. Still, credit where credit's due - the list of nations was for 12 of the world's largest economies (accounting for some 78% of global GDP). I guess it's a case of "Well done, but could do better".

The Party's Over

It was a weird feeling on Tuesday, heading off at 04.15 for the last time in my Olympic volunteer's uniform. The Games were over and what was there to look forward to? Perhaps a trip or two to the airport, or returning cars to a BMW depot.

In the end it turned out to be the latter - although the depot was a temporary holding space at Dartford Ferry Terminal.

With a final glass or two of wine we all departed to go our separate ways - quite possibly never to see each other again.

As I said, weird.

So - to all my fellow T2 drivers at Park Lane - to all my clients - to all the other volunteers I met along the way - thank you, it was a rewarding exercise.

Park Lane

With B155 - my usual car

Returning cars to Dartford

Porkie Pies - or Total Incompetence?

Did Theresas May really believe that G4S would overshoot their target? And was Nick Buckles really in the dark about how badly his organisation was managing?

Now, I happened to have dinner with an ex-City of London police officer at the end of April. He had been considering taking up a role and had talked the possibility through with a number of his colleagues. His verdict in April was:
(a) There will be a huge shortfall in numbers;
(b) The recruitment and training process is a shambles.

I leave you to make up your own mind.

Mind you - I think I'd rather have troops undertaking security details than temporary staff who have had just 4 days training.

Barclays et al

Why did it take Bob Diamond so long to go? In every organisation I have woked for it has been the Chief Executive who has publically set the cultural norms for the business. In Barclays it is clear that there was some sort of cultural problem - even if only in the investment banking part. Mr Diamond headed up that function before he became CEO. So - he had to go. It is worrying that the board appeared to want him to remain at the helm. Are these people living in such a rarified atmosphere that they simply do not understand? I also wonder about the head of Internal Audit and his/her team. What were they doing?

Olympic Volunteering and Extra Pay for Services

Last Friday I attended my latest Olympic volunteer training day - but that's not what I want to concentrate upon in this post. I came back to headlines about bus drivers demanding extra pay and threatening to go on strike which set me thinking about the cost to many of the volunteers. Some of the people I met on Friday had come considerable distances - Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, York. One person I talked to has already agreed to rent a flat in Croydon for the duration and will be giving up her earnings as a pharmacist for the pleasure.

So, I ran a quick calculation - suppose it costs a volunteer £30 every time they come into London and that person is giving up work valued at, say, £300 per day they will have paid quite a hefty cost (opporunity cost, much of it) by the end of the process. For someone who has attended an intial interview (1/2 day), undertaken training (3 days), collected their uniform and accreditation (1/2 day) and done 16 full volunteering stints (a full day, each - all my shifts are 10 hours) then using the above costs the overall value is some £6630.

So, bus drivers, train drivers, underground workers and anyone else aiming to squeeze extra cash for, yes, probably working harder - just think about the rewards for London and the country as a whole, and think about what the volunteers are giving up to make the whole exercise a success.

There - it's off my chest.

The Swifts Are Back

At this time of year there's always one thing to worry about. Will our swifts be back? We always have a few and it's a great joy to sit out on a balmy summer's evening to watch them screaming overhead. However, their numbers have been dwindling and we fear the first year when none returns. One Monday, one appeared. By Wednesday there were three up in the sky. And over the weekend four have been providing a wonderful aerial display. Four may seem (and is) very few - but at least it's not zero.

Litter, Litter Everywhere

Wonersh is a relatively small community with a population of about 1800. It is bisected by the B2128 which connects Guildford to Cranleigh and there is a branch off in the centre of the village to the next settlement - Bramley (and the A281). Twice a year we run a community litter pick to tidy the place up. Just look at what 15 of us collected over 1.5 hours last weekend:

Most of it came from those roads I mentioned - and at the extremities of the village to boot. In other words those responsible were car drivers and passengers passing through the village, not the residents themselves. Shame on the lot of you!

Greenest Government Ever?

I've banged on about this several times. Now Greenpeace has tried to test opinion as to whether voters belive that we do, indeed, have the greenest government ever. Sadly, only 2% of those questioned appear to have answered in the affirmative. Well, well, well.

What Price Nuclear?

Wow! It's over a month since I last posted anything. Sorry about that to my loyal band of followers. It's been a hectic time. So many organisations have an April year end and silly budgetting arrangements that I've been snowed under with work. So much for semi-retirement! (Well, it could be argued to be semi as I did little over the summer!).

Anyway, 29th February saw the closure of Oldbury PS - something of a blast from the past for yours truly - and then a month later Horizon owners RWE and E.On (who own land at Oldbury) announced that they are not proceeding with their joint venture. I can see that there may well be political reasons for these two companies to pull the plug, and quite possibly the economics also don't appear to stack up, but I think it is a bad news day for UK electricity production. I am convinced that the country needs nuclear and for two large companies with nuclear generating experience to pull out now has rather put the CO2 cat among the emissions reduction pigeons. Wind is just not going to do the job for us which leaves CCS which will be no picnic.

Growth - Will We Reach The Limits?

In 1798 Thomas Malthus published "An Essay on the Principle of Population" which contained some dire warnings for mankind. As we know, the agricultural and industrial revolutions rather put paid to those warnings - at least for the next couple of centuries. Then, in 1972, the Club of Rome issued "Limits to Growth", which again, posited, in most of the scenarios investigated, a turning point, possibly catastrophic, around 2030. Although the predicitions are now much derided a revisit 30 years on did not suggest that the issues have changed radically.

With all the recent talk about growth being the way out of the current national financial mess I've been musing about whether, on a more parochial level, we have actually reached a point where growth is not the paradigm to be adhered to. My rather under-developed thoughts run along these lines:

The UK has prospered as a service-based country for the last few decades, gaining from providing added-value services to the baby boomer generation (my generation!). Now the baby boomers are all retiring and are switching out of fat salaries into somewhat slimmer pensions (though not as slim as the likely pensions of the follow on generation - but that's another story). So - big question - will there be a growth market for value-add services? Quite possibly not in the UK and western Europe. So how about the emerging economies (BRICS, for instance)? Well, they may be emerging but per capita earnings aren't that high so it must be questioned as to whether there is a market for the UK there.

Which takes me back to my original thought. Is it time for a paradigm shift for the UK?

Dual Energy and Water Saving

Edie has recently reported that British Gas and Thames Water are getting together to jointly promote energy and water saving. (The cynic in me thinks that Thames could have done that with Npower ages ago when they were both owned by RWE - but that's another story). Now this makes sense - energy and water saving are inextricably linked. However I do carp a bit at the following statement from a Consumer Council for Water spokesman: "For instance, often water in homes is heated up only to cool down and then be re-heated again - a problem that can be addressed simply enough with a combination boiler". Well, possibly - but wouldn't a timer or programmer be a cheaper approach?

Confusing C Label To Go?

It would appear that Tesco is backing away from carbon labelling its products. I can't say I'm surprised. At the time of its launch (I think the first product to be labelled was a bag of crisps) many of us said the label was confusing and would not help the average consumer in his/her choice making. A Carbon Trust spokesperson expressed regret that Tesco is dropping the label but did trumpet the fact that the label is now used on £3bn worth of goods (presumably that is per year - the article didn't say - more sloppy journalism). When put alongside a €120bn loan to Greece does that really amount to a hill of beans? Frankly I think a better bet might be to provide every household with a copy of "How Bad Are Bananas?" by Mike Berners-Lee. At least that way a few people would pick up the principles of carbon footprinting rather than being faced with an inexplicable label.

Energy Bills and Energy Illiteracy

I've just skimmed through Ofgem's latest Consumer First findings on energy information from suppliers. It makes depressing reading - not because of suppliers' attitudes or inability to explain things clearly (a bit more on that later), but because of the appalling energy illiteracy displayed by some of Ofgem's panelists.

Now, I agree that some information from supply companies is not the easiest read. My own supplier has a "Jargon Buster" section on the back of my statement which could, I believe be improved . Take this, for instance:
"Correction factor - The amount by which we adjust the amount of gas you've used to take account of the season."
Is that helpful for Joe Public? No - not really. It doesn't say why a correction factor is needed, what the physical driver is. I bet many would just say "This must be a scam". Interestingly in the corner of that section is the Crystal Mark logo!

But what I really find upsetting are statements such as "What is a kilowatt?" and "Say it in English, not kilowatts. You've had your energy on for so many hours and it will cost you this much, that would be brilliant". Is our education system so poor that people cannot understand kilowatts and kilowatt hours? Evidently, yes. Take this marvellous suggested explanation of a kWh: "1 kW = 5 mins of hot water running or 15 mins of cold water". One despairs.

And it's not only energy illiteracy that is evident: "I don't understand; the word tariff means nothing". Oh dear, another English teacher has failed!

Verdict? Could do better all round!

Consequential Improvements

According to Andrew Stunnell consequential improvements really will become part of Building Regulations Part L in the next revision. It's about time too! I remember it being discussed and drafted in years ago - only to mysteriously disappear in the final version. It's interesting that this time CI will not only be triggered by extensions or other major works but also by boiler upgrades or window replacements. It makes sense.

What Is This Tosh?

Have you seen the latest DECC press statement? It says that the wind industry has confirmed a vision that UK firms will supply more than 50% of the content of future windfarms. Confirmed a vision? What nonsense! Come on guys, what you should be doing is confirming action - not just a vision!

The Panels Are Up

Well, we finally did it, signed on the bottom line, BACSed the money and our PV panels were installed at the end of last week. They've even generated a modest about of energy since then. It's not the cheapest way of reducing our carbon footprint but it's one that is automatic from now on. I'll be interested to see what FiT rate we finally qualify for but I've crunched the numbers and, even making very modest assumptions about electricity price escalation, the whole thing just about works at 21p. Of course - if interest rates rocket and inflation doesn't then I'll have to admit to making a poor investment choice. Watch this space - for a good few years to come!

Another One For the Photo And Shame Log

Social Media and Business Risks

As a two-bit/two-person organisation Bawden Consulting has not much of a web presence and dabbles at the fringes of social media. However, we've been fascinated to note the rise of social media use across the business world. Now (actually September 2011 - shows how up to date we are!) the Ponemon Institute has published a survey report detailing the views of IT security practitioners with respect to the risks businesses run through their adoption of social media.

The report notes that most of the survey respondents agree that the use of social media in the workplace is important to achieveing business objectives, particularly though enhancing brand awareness and providing a powerful intelligence gathering process. However, respondents also agreed that social media tools can put organisations at risk and that many do not have mitigation mechanisms in place.

The survey found that organisations are most concerned with employees downloading apps or widgets, and posting unauthorised, uncensored content and blog entries. Employees are increasingly using social media tools for non-business purposes and the incidence of malware infections is increasing. Never-the-less, organisations are increasing their bandwidth to accommodate the increased use of social media in the workplace.

Among the top fve risks discussed is non-compliance with records management regulations. This is what concerns me most on a personal level. Just who can access any personal information I might divulge though a personal media application?

Nuclear Stress Test

The ONR has recently published its report on stress testing of UK nuclear power stations following the Fukushima incident. The report finds that there are "no major weaknesses" but does call for on-going improvements. Particular areas to be targetted are flood defence and coolant supply enhancement. I guess this is only to be expected given what happened at Fukushima.

While all this is reassuring for the current fleet we should remember that much of this will be retired in the not-to-distant future and that we'll be building a whole new phase of PWRs. Making sure that these are robust from the outset is massively important.

Ofgem Fines

So Ofgem has imposed a penalties of £2.5M on BG and £2.0M on npower for breaches of the Consumer Complaints Handling Standards Regulations. Given that the charge represents just 0.02% of BG's turnover will this do any good? Perhaps the line managers responsible will get a good kicking but then it'll all get forgotten. What about those who oversee the whole shebang? Isn't this another area where shareholders ought to be rattling a few cages (it's their money, after all). How about the penalites being recovered from the bonus pots of the respective Executives?

38 Degrees & Gas Prices

I've just received a request from 38 Degrees to sign a petition about gas prices.

38 Degrees have done some good stuff in the past but this petition is just so simplistic as to be laughable. Whoever put the petition together clearly does not understand the dynamics of the gas market - particularly the nature of forward contracts and hedging. Consequently they do not warn anyone that if supply companies were to follow the wholesale market, as they appear to want, then gas prices would be uncomfortably volatile for many consumers.

This is one petition I shall not be signing.

Top Legal Tips for Start-ups

Several friends have recently asked me about what I had to do to start up Bawden Consulting as they, too, are thinking of striking out on their own. For them the top tips in this link may well be helpful. 'Fraid, guys, you'll have to sign up to the service to read them!!

A Long Way From LOLP*VOLL

Apparently DECC has published an estimate that payments to generators under the new capacity mechanism will total some £2.8bn through to 2030. DECC has pencilled in 2015 as the date for the first auction under the mechanism as over 10GW of coal-fired capacity will have to come off the system under LCPD rules. It makes one yearn for the days of LOLP*VOLL!!

Boom, Boom, Boom?

I've recently been flicking through Exxon Mobile's recent publication "Outlook for Energy: A View to 2040". If you're in the energy business you might be encouraged by its findings but environmentalists will be deeply depressed. Here are some of its predictions:

> Global energy demand will be about 30% higher in 2040 compared to 2010. So much for efficiencies, then. And think of some of the consequences!
> Energy demand growth will slow as population growth moderates. Well, it's got to, really, hasn't it?
> OECD countries will see essentially flat energy use. By contrast, non-OECD countries will grow by close to 60%. There has to be a move to greater equality but it's not good news if the developed nations cannot reduce demand through efficiencies.
> Electricity generation will account for more than 40% of global energy consumption. Well, that fits with thoughts about decarbonised grids etc. but there is a CO2 sting in the tail. Wait for it.
> Oil, coal and gas will continues to be the most widely used fuels. Told you!
> Demand for coal will peak and then gradually decline. But what about clean coal technologies?
> Natural gas will grow fast enough to overtake coal. I can see gas as a stepping stone to cleaner generation etc., but this reads like an end in itself.
> For both both oil and natural gas, an increasing share of supply will come from unconventional sources. Think of shale gas. Well, if you're going to satisfy an increasing demand that is going to be the only way to do it.
> Global energy-related CO2 emissions will grow slowly and level off around 2030. Isn't that a tad late?

All-in-all it's not a pretty sight, although the pessimist/realist in me thinks some of this will come to pass.

Intelligent Mobility

On one of the season's obligatory trips to visit relatives I had to pass over the M25 along the A3. At 11am the clockwise carriageway was crawling which set me to musing about the variable speed limit technology along that stretch of the motorway and why it sometimes appears not to be effective. (I think there's probably some relatively simple queuing theory work that would explain that little problem). Then a day or so later I chanced upon the Automotive Council's (didn't know there was such a thing - did you?) recent report on "Intelligent Mobility".

The report points out that the UK, ranking in the top 25 most wealthy nations, is the 8th most densely populated (population per sq mile) and 5th most congested (population per road mile). It posits the thought that we are heading for a congestion crisis but that the most proposed allevition measures are simply non-starters. On one side there is no space, time nor money for a massive infrastructure expansion. On the other wholesale modal shift just ain't going to happen. So it argues for a "third way" (don't you just hate that phase?) - which the authors term "Intelligent Mobility".

Much of the report is dedicated to a review of the current status and a look forward to pathways for development. For a lay person like me it's all interesting stuff. How disappointing then to find the report's recommendations saying little more than "we need to meet and discuss". (A bit cruel that - but a true reflection of my thoughts when I reached that point).

For anyone half interested in how we might manage our road infrastructure in the next couple of decades the data and pointers in this report are worth your perusal.